A RIGHT-WING ECOSYSTEM

 

[Note:  From time to time, this blog issues a set of postings that summarize what the blog has been emphasizing in its previous postings.  Of late, the blog has been looking at various obstacles civics educators face in teaching their subject.  It’s time to post a series of such summary accounts.  The advantage of such summaries is to introduce new readers to the blog and to provide a different context by which to review the blog’s various claims and arguments.  This and upcoming summary postings will be preceded by this message.]

[Further note:  Merry Christmas to all.]

To further solidify the right of center alliance in the national polarized political landscape there is a “right-wing media ecosystem.”  The public has been given an insight into this ecosystem as a result of various researchers like Robert Faris, et al.[1]  They found that that media group made up of such outlets as Fox News set up two dynamics in 2016 that zeroed-in on the Clinton Foundation.  Picking up a long-standing practice of opposition research, they augmented it to a new level.  It was noted for how deep, well-researched, and how far back it went.

          Of interest, to those who follow such developments, it began before Trump was part of the story.  It seems this turn was initiated with the publication of the book, Clinton Cash, which brought out how the Clintons received speaking fees and donations to the Clinton Foundation for, as the allegation says, policy decisions – when Hillary was secretary of state – or policy proposals.  The book states the Clintons’ wealth ballooned to $130 million and according to its author, Peter Schweizer, was the product of corrupt payoffs.

          Problem is, according to the reportage including a Newsweek review, the book does not provide evidence other than questionable timing.[2]  But this shortcoming did not inhibit Steve Bannon and his Breitbart News from distributing a film version of the book.  All this was strategically timed to be released as the 2016 Democratic Party convention ended and was expecting the usual post-convention bump. 

This was joined with a well-organized email campaign to highlight the release of the film.  And to top it all off, once word began to filter into mainline media, the ecosystem went all out promoting the story and the film.  With this development, that regular media could not ignore the “story” and added it to its list of storylines. 

No one can tell how much harm this whole media blitz did to Clinton’s run for president and the election of Trump – who benefitted and became the center of the ecosystem’s attention.  They, the compilation of effects, legitimized these accusations against Clinton.  A lot of later analysis has discussed the fairness of these activities.  And, in turn, has led to a discussion as to how the mainline media could have – and could in the future – be more aware and more of a supervising entity to avoid such manipulation of the news. 

The main obstacles to policing these moves would be First Amendment rights especially those relating to free speech and even to freedom of the press.  It seems the media, in this case was played to advance dubious charges against the Democratic candidate and, one can argue, probably, along with many other factors, swayed the result of that election. 

Subsequently, questions arose such as who funded Schweizer or what interests backed his efforts and the activities that followed?  Whoever they were, they led to what is called a media ecosystem that survived the 2016 election and is alive and well today.  Perhaps the results of the 2020 election will play as a damper on it, but this writer believes it won’t.

One hopeful result from the 2016 experience is that mainline media and news outlets have learned some lessons.  It is still observed that through Fox and now Newsmax, along with a vibrant right-wing, social media world, right-wing propaganda does not suffer from a lack of eyes and ears.  And it has become noted that foreign governments not friendly to American interests have found ways to infiltrate or otherwise influence what appears on those ecosystem outlets.

Also, out-and-out false messaging has characterized a good deal of what those outlets report.  Misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic and the 2020 election, for examples, has been currently part of the mix.  According to recent polling, they have been able to persuade a good number of Americans about not only false information but dangerous information.  According to a Fact Tank article in July,

Most Americans (71%) have heard of a conspiracy theory circulating widely online that alleges that powerful people intentionally planned the coronavirus outbreak.  And a quarter of U.S. adults see at least some truth in it – including 5% who say it is definitely true and 20% who say it is probably true, according to a June Pew Research Center survey.  The share of Americans who see at least some truth to the theory differs by demographics and partisanship.[3]

Along with this belief in a conspiracy, there are significant numbers who don’t even believe there is a pandemic to begin with and a lot of that is due to what people read online. 

Of course, these beliefs can lead to deadly results as they have led to belittling the dangers associated with the virus.  In addition, one can attribute dangerous undermining of the nation’s political, institutionalized processes – e.g., elections – and what Americans decide to believe concerning important national conditions. 

Clever manipulation of messaging – with the use of humor or other meme techniques – has resulted in serious undermining of those national activities successfully taking place.  The most recent example has resulted in the 2020 presidential election results being judged, in sizable quarters, as illegitimate.[4]

The next posting will look at left of center efforts.

---

[1] Robert Faris, Hal Roberts, Bruce Etling, Nikki Bourassa, Ethan Zuckerman, and Yochai Benkler, “Partisanship, Propaganda, & Disinformation: Online Media & the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election,” Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, Harvard Library (n.d.), accessed August 19, 2020, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/76a9/3eb0bed8ff032c44186678c5279f20cc5ff8.pdf?_ga=2.230250332.1151241653.1597869609-1463880478.1597869609 .

[2] Taylor Wofford, “Everything You Need to Know about ‘Clinton Cash,’” Newsweek, May 1, 2015, accessed August 20, 2020, https://www.newsweek.com/everything-you-need-know-about-clinton-cash-327694 .

[3] Katherine Schaeffer, “A Look at the Americans Who Believe There Is Some Truth to the Conspiracy Theory That COVID-19 Was Planned, Fact Tank:  News in the Numbers, July 24, 2020, accessed December 23, 2020, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/07/24/a-look-at-the-americans-who-believe-there-is-some-truth-to-the-conspiracy-theory-that-covid-19-was-planned/ .

[4] It seems over 30% of electorate hold doubts or indicate they do not know whether Joe Biden won the election.  This is offset by the majority believing he did win.  See “Most Americans Believe the Election Results – Some Don’t,” NPR, WFSU Public Media, December 9, 2020, accessed December 23, 2020, https://www.npr.org/2020/12/09/944685514/most-americans-believe-the-election-results-some-dont.